Free markets is an economic system where the prices for goods and services are set freely by consent between buyers and sellers; the laws and forces of supply and demand are free from any intervention by government, price-setting monopoly or other authority.

Buyers and sellers should have the freedom to negotiate prices without interference.

No one should be forced to buy or sell at a set price.

Nor should anyone be limited in the amount of a good or service they produce.

Buyers and sellers do not want outsiders, especially the government, dictating prices or supply.

The government is not needed to set prices or supply of goods and services.

The rule of law (also known as nomocracy) primarily refers to the influence and authority of law within society, especially as a constraint upon behavior, including behavior of government officials.

END

Simplified: it means that all laws apply to everybody especially the government.

Laws should not be bent for anyone. Just because the public, any group or government entity does not like the result in certain cases should have no effect on the administration of any law. There are many cases where the law has been bent out of sympathy for the guilty or the desire of benefit by the selfish.

Just about everyone claims to be in favor of freedom. But few seem to agree on what it means.

One person’s idea of freedom can actually violate another person’s freedom. To one person, it means doing what he wants with his own life. To another, it means doing what he wants with other people’s lives. Both say that the other one’s concept of freedom is tyranny.

To the laissez-faire businessman, freedom means an end to all government regulation. To the communist, freedom can be achieved only when individual incentive has been crushed and “the people” own everything. (Are you starting to feel uncomfortable?)

Some people believe that job quotas for minority groups promote freedom. But to a person who is truly anti-discriminatory, quotas are a violation of freedom.

Throughout history, men have miscommunicated on this subject. Since conservatives, liberals, fascists, communists — and every other group — all claim to be in favor of freedom, they cannot be talking about the same thing.

The dictionary defines freedom as “being free.” In turn, free is defined as “not under the control or power of another.” How can there be so much confusion over a definition so clearly stated?

Utopian thinkers have always confused freedom with equality. But nothing could be more incorrect. Nature has made freedom and equality totally incompatible. “Freedom and equality,” wrote Will and Ariel Durant, “are sworn and everlasting enemies, and when one prevails the other dies.”

When most people talk about freedom, they tend to think in terms of freedom for themselves. They see freedom as a license to do as they please. Thus, you may be surprised to find that when people espouse freedom, often they are referring to their freedom, not yours. Worse, you are likely to discover that their freedom necessitates the violation of your freedom.

The only way freedom can be rationally viewed is as the freedom for each individual to do as he pleases, so long as he does not commit aggression against anyone else.

Presidential candidates love to talk about freedom, even while telling us how they intend to further limit our freedoms. They do this by manufacturing “rights” out of thin air. The last batch of candidates was especially bold in this respect.

The problem is that all artificially created rights are anti-freedom. Because in order to fulfill one person’s rights, another person’s must be violated.

At the heart of such thinking is what I call GAVEC. (That stands for guiltism, angerism, villainism, envyism, and covetism.) People suffering from GAVEC are usually unable to achieve success in a free society. Thus they yearn for an external force (government) to “level the playing field” and equalize results.

True freedom means freedom for the “poor,” the “rich,” the “handicapped,” the “oppressed,” the “weak,” and the “strong.” Simply put, it means freedom for everyone.

Think about this as candidates start to step up their promises to fulfill artificially created rights. Everything in life has a price. And, make no mistake about it, the price of artificially created rights is the exchange of your rights for someone else’s.

Look in the mirror and ask yourself, “Is that what I really want — for me or my children?” I would hope not.

END

FREEDOM for EVERYBODY is the TENET of NEW POLITICAL PARTY.

Few people are going to agree with the above essay. The reasons were explained in the essay; but all of the reasons equate to selfishness and thus EVIL.

A political ideology is a certain set of ideals, principles, doctrines, myths or symbols of a social movement, institution, class, and or large group that explains how society should work, and offers some political and cultural blueprint for a certain social order. A political ideology largely concerns itself with how to allocate power and to what ends it should be used.

End

Huh?

This is what political parties, political groups, politicians and anyone politically active use to justify taking(stealing) and cheating other groups/sectors of society. In short, an excuse to do evil.

NEW POLITICAL PARTY will have no ideology. It will be about fairness to ALL.